Church and State - Do leaders have a right to speak out?

Not sure if you read the short opinion piece by Gerard Henderson in the SMH on Tuesday 19th June but it offered welcome support from a secular institute to church leaders who speak out on important issues. George Pell's comments in the recent stem cell debate led to almost hysterical comments from many politicians and community leaders. Henderson makes the point that people can be very selective in whether and when they want church leaders to speak out. He cites Michael Burleigh (2007) who has written that Europe's public culture is dominated by 'sneering secularists' who set the tone for the population. As Henderson also points out, secularists like Richard Dawkins have dominated a great deal of the public space in recent times with their claims. So why shouldn't Christians express their views. Of course this is exactly why CASE exists, to provide opportunities for Christians to express their thoughts on any contemporary issue that they see as important. If you'd like to read more about the relationship between Church and State why not have a look at the 2005 New College Lecture material. In fact you can buy the DVD that includes all the lectures from Andrew Cameron, Kevin Rudd and John Anderson for just $5.

Trevor Cairney's First Entry

This is my first entry as the new director of CASE and is simply an introduction. My name is Trevor Cairney and I have been Master of New College since 2002. I created CASE to replace what had been an Institute for Values Research at the college (that ran for about 15 years). I had the good sense to appoint Greg Clarke as the fulltime director of CASE in 2003. With his departure I'm back as the Director of CASE (and yes, I'm still Master of New College). I'm keen to continue the great work that Greg established, but will no doubt put my own stamp on the centre.

My background is primarily that of an academic who has spent over 30 years researching how children learn language. I also had a 10 year parallel diversion into research on urban development when I established a research centre focussed on regional, urban and industrial development. I had studied urban development and planning and economics in my very first degree in the 1970s and returned to this during the 1990s while I was Pro Vice-chancellor at the University of Western Sydney and attempting to build the institution's research program.

I came to faith in Christ as a 31 year old (as did my wife Carmen) and became involved almost immediately in campus-based Christian work as well as work with youth and young adults in our church. I was an associate staff worker for AFES for many years while working as an academic at several universities and have filled various roles with AFES including a stint as Chair of the National Board (until last year). So, I've always had a passion for young people and a desire to see them explore matters of faith. I'm a tragic husband, father and grandfather and love my family very much. My immediate family consists of my wife Carmen, my children Nicole and Louise, their husbands David and Jon and 4 wonderful grandchildren Jacob, Rebecca, Elsie and Samuel (see for LOTS of photos on my website). As Master of New College I have the opportunity to draw on all the bits of my past in a focussed way. As a Christian academic I'm conscious that people's perspectives on their world are very much shaped by the things they believe or don't believe. CASE provides a wonderful vehicle to engage with others in conversation about a limitless range of topics. I hope that through this Blog you will contribute your thoughts and suggestions that will help us grow in our understanding of God and how he would have us live in his world.

Goodbye from Greg

Dear CASE friends

You will most likely know by now that I have left CASE to become Director of Macquarie Christian Studies Institute at Macquarie University here in Sydney, and to co-direct a new centre called Public Christianity Australia based in the Sydney CBD with Dr John Dickson. This will be my last blog entry here, and Trevor Cairney takes over as Director of CASE blogging!
Thanks to everyone who read and responded to the thoughts published here. May God bless you and keep you.


Send CASE an email
or Send Greg an email

Play your cards

Is there a God gene? A gay gene? A Murdering gene? People have long been fascinated with the question of whether genetics will show that we are not responsible for our behaviours. The evidence is producing a clearer picture: the answer is yes and no. Francis Collins, author of this and head of this has described the situation well: "There is an inescapable component of heritability to many human behavioural traits...for virtually none of them, is heredity ever close to predictive...Yes, we have all been dealt a particular set of cards, and the cards will eventually be revealed. But how we play the hand is up to us." Many traits (cognitive ability, agression, conscientiousness, etc) are estimated to be around 50% hereditary; in other words, we are roughly half-responsible for what we do. Or, to address the issue in the way it is often put to me as a Christian thinker, God is only about half-to-blame for the situation you find yourself in. More here.

51% deified

According to a recent poll 60% of Australians think Jesus is either God (51%) or specially connected to God (9%). In other words, the majority of Australians think very highly of Jesus. This is also significant, because it assumes people's belief in the existence of God to start with, a fact often undermined in reports about secular society. When I last looked, the world's population was 6.7 billion, and according to the Cambridge Companion to Atheism only 500-750 million of them are atheists (that's just over 11%). God is still in the house, and Jesus is more often than not with him.

People surveyed were also asked who they thought Jesus would vote for—Kevin Rudd or John Howard. 27% said Rudd, 14% Howard, but a very wise 30% said they were unsure. Pollsters would no doubt be intrigued by the stat that among 'regular churchgoers' (whatever that means), despite being painted as conservatives by most people, Kevin Rudd is just ahead by 25% to 19%.

Send CASE an email

My climate change

I spent most of my teenage years convinced that Ecclesiastes had the truest vision of life. Vanity…nothing changes…nothing makes any difference...just accept it, let God be God and don’t expect too much. University in the 80s schooled me in the secular equivalent, literary modernism, and it all came to mind again last weekend reading an article on Leonard Woolf which brought back this quote.
Strangely enough, the hard evidence on climate change has convinced me that is not the Christian way, it's not the gospel way.
Human beings actually have made a difference to the world itself for the worst, it seems. But a difference can also be made for the better. Big things do change. Take smoking; I never imagined it would fall from favour, even in face of the health issues. But smokers are now unwelcome even in Irish pubs! Likewise, sexual discrimination and abuse: how wonderful that it is now taken seriously, the reverse of what I would have imagined happening in a post-Christian world. I’m also of the view that we really could seriously reduce extreme poverty by pursuing the Millennium Development Goals (but I acknowledge that some of my Christian economist friends aren’t with me on this). And I'm convinced that these are all good things, worth doing.
Over the twenty years since I first came to university, I’ve changed from a pessimistic fatalist about human capacity to a cagey optimist. I've gone from this U2 lyric to this speech. Wonder what changes the next twenty (dv) will bring, and will U2 be around to provide the soundtrack?!
Send CASE an email

Who cares?

One of the hats I wear is Anglicare Council member. I'm thrilled about the upcoming conference we are organising on human need and a Christian philosophy of care—a joint effort between a number of organisations. The Anglicare Council has been thinking through the Christian rationale for care (feedback welcome when it goes online at the Anglicare site) and I've done some interesting reading around it.

I'm convinced that one under-examined reason for Christians being involved in care is so that others don't do it instead! This seemingly bizarre line of thought runs thus:

• people are naturally attracted to those who care for them;


• if those who care for them hold a particular worldview, that worldview is more likely to be accepted by the care recipient;


• it is hard to challenge a worldview that someone has accepted because of the care shown to them by its adherents;


• therefore, Christians should be involved in care so that many will be more readily disposed to accepting the Christian message and not be drawn to accept other worldviews instead.

Now before people jump up and down crying “Manipulation! Coercion! Entrapment!”, let me emphasise that there is no obligation on a care recipient to accept the Christian worldview (Christians care for all comers). Rather, I'm just stating the bald reality that doing good deeds for someone predisposes them to accept your worldview.

The 4th century pagan emperor Julian saw what was up: he ordered his leaders to found hospitals, charities and welfare services, because the Christians were doing it and attracting everyone to their ‘atheism’ (i.e. denial of the pantheon of gods)! More on this here .

Os Guinness writes here that “historians view the Christian practice of caring as a prime reason why an obscure, marginal movement on the fringe of the Roman Empire rose to dislodge classical paganism and became the dominant faith of Western civilization and the world's first universal religion” (p.125).

When you care for people they are likely to care about what you believe and say.

Send CASE an email